A mockery of justice: The Trayvon Martin case (An Open Letter to President Obama)

trayvon_martinBelow is the statement issued by President Obama:

“The death of Trayvon Martin was a tragedy. Not just for his family, or for any one community, but for America. I know this case has elicited strong passions. And in the wake of the verdict, I know those passions may be running even higher. But we are a nation of laws, and a jury has spoken. I now ask every American to respect the call for calm reflection from two parents who lost their young son. And as we do, we should ask ourselves if we’re doing all we can to widen the circle of compassion and understanding in our own communities. We should ask ourselves if we’re doing all we can to stem the tide of gun violence that claims too many lives across this country on a daily basis. We should ask ourselves, as individuals and as a society, how we can prevent future tragedies like this. As citizens, that’s a job for all of us. That’s the way to honor Trayvon Martin.”


Subscribe to our Substack community GRP Insider to receive by email our in-depth free weekly newsletter. Opt into a paid subscription and you'll get premium insider briefs and insights from us.
Subscribe to our Substack newsletter, GRP Insider!
Learn more

I agree with Mr. Obama that the death of Trayvon Martin was a tragedy, categorically disagree with him that because the jury has spoken his calling for all Americans to engage in a so-called “calm reflection” from two parents who lost their young son.

The question there is: under the prevailing circumstances, how to remain calm? Why would the parents of that young black teenager will going to reflect on the whole tragic event?

Mr. Obama, you yourself is also a parent and may I remind you of your own words last year with regard to this incident:

“If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”

Do you remember, sir?

During that period when the controversy is raging, you made a searingly personal plea for Americans to come together and do some “soul searching” after the shooting death of that African-American Florida teenager Trayvon Martin by a neighbourhood watchman.

You further added that:

“My main message is to the parents of Trayvon Martin. You know, if I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon. And you know, I think they are right to expect that all of us as Americans are going to take this with the seriousness it deserves and that we’re get to the bottom of exactly what happened.

“All of us have to do some soul searching to figure out how does something like this happen — and that means that we examine the laws and the context for what happened as well as the specifics of the incident.

“Obviously this is a tragedy. I can only imagine what these parents are going through. And when I think about this boy, I think about my own kids. And I think every parent in America should be able to understand why it is absolutely imperative that we investigate every aspect of this and that everybody pulls together, federal, state and local to figure out exactly how this tragedy happened.”

Do you still recall all of these words, sir?

Yes, your country is known as a government of laws, not of men; but that bastard trigger happy “white Hispanic” (whatever the hell that means!) has put the laws into his hands and killed a human being.

Yes, your jury has spoken, but it does not mean that they’ve spoken the truth or decided the right thing!

I questioned the wisdom and the propriety of their ruling and bluntly accusing them for being biased and unfair.

I am condemning your nation’s so-called “legal” concept of “Stand Your Ground” laws that allowed a bloody bastard murderer like your Zimmerman to walk free on the night that he shot cold-bloody and killed arbitrarily the unarmed 17-year-old Martin.

I am also condemning that lobbying group known as ALEC that is one of your numerous ultraright-wing groups that crafted this so-called law”.

Who or what are this bullshit ALEC?

According to the Global Occupy Movement:

“ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) is a tool for corporations to obtain access to thousands of legislators, helping them to work hand in hand to develop profitable legislation. ALEC says it promotes “free-market and conservative ideas”, including: resolutions against increasing the minimum wage, against attempts by the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, against “comparable worth” legislation that would encourage equal pay for women, privatization of prisons and replacing unionized workers with prison labor, protection of companies engaged in cruel and unnecessary animal testing, etc.”

You are asking sir, how would you as an individual and as a nation, will prevent a horrible tragedy like this from occurring again in the future?

That is a good question, yet have you also asked the other equally important question: did your world-renowned justice system render genuine and correct justice to Trayvon?

Also, pertinent to the ultimate resolution of this case is the question that you, sir need to address is: what is your position with regard to this ALEC group?

I believe that the correct way and proper manner of honoring Trayvon is not only in curbing your gun laws, but also by giving that poor boy the justice that he, his family and all people like them, who are similarly situated — deserve!

Undoubtedly, another utterly important way of honoring Trayvon is to order your Department of Justice to review the whole case.

We all know the truth that this case is yet another classic example of racial injustice, preposterous prolifing, arrogance, ignorance and extreme discrimination!

Do something, sir, before the whole of your people goes out to the street to demand justice!

Because there is no iota of doubt that in the end, WE ARE ALL TRAYVON MARTIN!

Of all the people, you should be the first one to protest this indescribable travesty and mockery of justice, you as being the first Black American president of the United States of America.

Please fulfill your father’s dream!

That is how we honor the boy and making sure that he did not die in vain!

In the stirring words of Frederick Douglass:

“At a time like this, scorching irony, not convincing argument, is needed. O! Had I the ability, and could reach the nation’s ear, I would, today, pour out a fiery stream of biting ridicule, blasting reproach, withering sarcasm, and stern rebuke. For it is not light that is needed, but fire; it is not the gentle shower, but thunder. We need the storm, the whirlwind, and the earthquake. The feeling of the nation must be quickened; the conscience of the nation must be roused; the propriety of the nation must be startled; the hypocrisy of the nation must be exposed; and its crimes against God and man must be proclaimed and denounced.” (The Meaning of July Fourth for the Negro, July 5, 1852)

Hence, based on that, sir, let me issue again my disgust and dissent: I am denouncing to the utmost the utterly idiotic and impertinent ruling reached by that ridiculous jury and I am also condemning in part the racism still prevalent in your country and the double standard of your overall so-called justice system.

My solidarity to the family of Trayvon Martin and all victims of violence, racism, and discrimination like him!


158 Replies to “A mockery of justice: The Trayvon Martin case (An Open Letter to President Obama)”

  1. Where are the inbred thinkers here who think that American insitutions which are not patronage-based are much better than the patronage-based RP system? They can both fucked-up real bad…

    Dysfunction is not the exclusive domain of the Pinoys..

    1. Tsk tsk. You can see the way you consistently miss entire points because of the way you take every opportunity to express some butthhurt you experienced in other threads. Kawawang attorney (with a small “a”). 😀

      1. An astute observation regarding the rantings of the Sidecar Citizen. From reading his half-baked theories on American politics and his revisionist history, I would say he probably agrees with Jose, but still wanted to attack him.

      2. @Chris: Yeah. It’s not wether or not “attorney” JCC agreed or disagreed with this article, it’s about whether he understood the point it was trying to make or, on his part, made any point in any of the comments he’s made thus far to begin with.

    2. Like a typical Pinoy, you will always find a way to say that Pinoys are superior to or are better off than foreigners in some way even when it is totally irrelevant to the main point being discussed.

      Have you ever considered asking for a refund from where you studied law, Mr. abogado de patola?

        1. Hahaha.

          i am just appaled by the way you pick on pinoys…

          What is “pick on Pinoys” for you, is, for people with bigger minds and free of the pa-victim inaapi mentality which you have just shown so exquisitely, criticism and opportunities to improve.

          Perhaps then, Pinoys need to think about how they can stop being a target (easy at that) for “pick-on” by actually proving that they can learn from past mistakes.

          Besides, that other cultures have dysfunctions like Pinoys do has never been an excuse for them to be complacent about their own dysfunctions. I wonder if you will ever be able to understand that.

    3. Nice to hear from the Sidecar Citizen, who would still be sitting around drinking Redhorse with his barcada if not for his wife wanting a better life in America.At least you are not weighing in on the situation, for it would show your ignorance.

      1. hehehe… a typical of a white american flaunting his superiority complex over an indio.. 🙂

        i will not go down your level padre by using gutter language…

        contrary to your inuendo that my skill is at the level of notary public, i have records for suing big companies and won the case against them. I sued PLDT and Gokongwei’s Ramada Chain of HOtels. I won both cases Ramada did not appeal the case to the higher court so there was no record of it online but i can fax you my case file.

        here is PLDT’s case:


        1. Lol…

          a typical of a white american flaunting his superiority complex over an indio…

          An excellent example of that renowned Victim Mentality typical of Da Pinoy. 😀

        2. hehehe… that is conclusionary.. no basis in fact your honor… i am just showing that i am superior to this white guy your honor and not the other way around… 🙂

          the use of “flaunting a white american superiority complex over an indio” is being used sarcastically your honor.. 🙂

          please compare his language to my language your honor. there is some decency in mine, his is pure gutter.

        3. Have you passed the BAR Exam in the US yet? Sorry for my “Gutter language”. I am only a high school grad. I never said I am superior to you. I just said that your reasoning is flawed. Based on your other comments about the US, I would describe you as a “low information voter” though.

        4. The comment regarding the notary skills was aimed at the author, who in addition to a degree in law, possesses numerous other degrees and has taught anthropology among other useful fields of study. He is clearly a professional student turned indoctrinator with no actual applicable experience.It was not aimed at you, JCC.

    4. I am really suprised the Sidecar Citizen does not agree with Jose as he, even though he lives in America has a flawed understanding.

  2. Before writing anything about the Treyvon-Zimmerman case, especially with this whole tripe, be sure to read the facts please, especially in this section:

    There’s also this issue about Treyvon’s past misdemeanors being covered up by the media:

    They never even brought up the contents of Treyvon’s cellphone, where he makes texts describing how he beats the crap out of people, matching his MO on how he physically overwhelmed Zimmerman.

    And if you’ve been around ghettos here in the US, you see 6′ 15-18 year old kids mugging, burglarizing and beating the crap out of people in certain areas, and your only real chance against any of them from beating the life out of you, stabbing, or killing you is a taser or a gun. That, or wait for a cop to come in eight minutes, and hope you’re not already dead by then.

    1. Those past misbehavior if any are irrelevant In the same way that the past behavior of Zimmerman beating up his wife was not relevant.

      Besides the Federal rules of evidence, which I am sure is also part of the Florida rules of evidence, prohibits the defendant to present evidence against victim’s previous “misconduct” unless ‘good conduct’ is introduced by Treyvon. The evidence is considered highly prejudicial and therefore inadmissible because the jury would look at the previous misconduct which is not being litigated to influence them on the issue at bar, the ‘shooting to death of Treyvon.’

      1. Irrelevant in what way? As far as the trial, they already have enough evidence to render Zimmerman not guilty of anything and lack any evidence to convict him to anything judging from the facts presented.

        These past behavior is completely relevant in justifying Zimmerman’s behavior, as well as describe the context of his situation on why he needed to keep close tabs on all strangers that come to his neighborhood and how he feels he’s responsible for the safety of these previously victimized neighbors whom he has a close-knit connection to.

        And as repeatedly stated, Zimmerman was told he didn’t need to follow Trayvon, but it’s a suggestion, not an order, by a dispatcher, not a cop. In such a situation, it’s the personnel in the field who makes the final call, not some dispatcher. In hindsight, it probably wasn’t a good idea, but a lot of people under such circumstances would have done the same thing, especially if something like the safety of your own friends and family are in your hands.

  3. Jose, maybe you should stick to Philippine issues. You have a poor understanding of the race issue in the US, the 2nd amendment, and this case in particular. I realize one of your many degrees is in law, and have no doubt that you are a very capable Notary.

    President Obama is one of the most devisive presidents in American history. Race relations were much better before he entered office. He is from the school of Divide and Conquer. ln 5 years he has managed to set the black population back several decades. President Obama, Al Sharpton, and Jesse Jackson are the engineers of this effort to further whip Americans ihto a frenzy. Travon Martin was a thug, a product of the Romanticizing of gang culture through MTV and BET. If he lived in The Philippines, he probably would have been “salvaged” by now. George Zimmerman was the eqivalent of a baranguay tanod. His neighborhood had been plagued with with robberies, home invasions, and burglaries. He confronted an unknown individual looking in windows as he went through the neighborhood and tge suspect tried to beat him, so he shot him. Cased Closed.

    I am a huge critic of President Obama, however, in this instance he or his speechwriters actually reflected on the situation and came up with the best response he could. If he would have expressed outrage and pulled out the race card, America would be burning right now. His statement, was the most presidential he has acted during his term in office

    I could go on and on regarding how flawed your understanding of American culture, laws, and this case in particular.

    1. Okay, I am not expecting an objective analysis from you because you are an Obama critic (hater). But which American culture I did not understand?

      Your jury system is flawed just like our judge-managed trial..

      I watched the trial. He stalked the black teenager, suspected him to be a criminal, initiated the confrontation, the victim reacted by punching him. Who would not be upset if you were being followed at nighttime and asked about your business in the neighborhood? Zimmerman could be a mugger.

      But the measure of self defense is this:

      “Reasonable belief of an imminent injury to life.”

      He stalked the victim, followed him despite the police officer’s instructions to stand down and stay at his car, he initiated the confrontation, he was not endangered because he was prepared for the situation by arming himself. He lured his victim into his trap so he can shoot him.

      The way your jury acquitted OJ Simpson for the death of Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman. Only this time, a young black guy was at the receiving end.

      Even regular Americans saw the injustice in this, and you cannot call them “ignorant of American culture.”

      Watch the protests on the streets of Chicago, California and New York. Some of those in the rallies are white Americans, who must therefore be ignorant of your culture too..

      BTW, I am a republican and I voted Romney, but that is beside the point. Your jury system is flawed just like any other judicial system in the third world. 🙂

      1. Kawawa naman si attorney de Patola (“attorney” with a small “a” and “Patola” with a big “P”). He is too fixated on comparing the surot that is the Just-tiis system of Da Pinas with the Justice System of the United States. The latter not being perfect (as any moron can declare) but a system that still works relatively.

        1. hehehe… i have already given you a proof that i am not attorney with small a and de patola, but you keep regurgitating that “inbred” labelling on my person.. don’t get fixated on me.. discuss the issues? 🙂

        2. BTW Benigno, here, I have saved the neck of one Avelino Barasona from life imprisonment… Please click on the link below then click on the “syllabus” on the right hand corner then go to the bottom left hand corner of the page, you will see JCC as the lawyer of Avelino Barasona.
          Just making sure that contrary to your appendage on my person as attorney de patola, I have served people of humble origin — pennyless victims of injustice. May I ask, for your credential please. You seem to know everything.


        3. Dude, my comments on your being an attorney de Patola (“attorney” with a small “a” and “Patola” with a big “P”) were based on my observations on the comments you make here within the domain of GRP. Nothing more, nothing less. As such, I now find it kinda pathetic that you’d dig up something out of your resume to present to this forum. Considering you’ve indicated the smallness of your regard for us many times, it comes across as quite ironic that you now see us as important enough to present your CV before us to behold. You reall have quite a load to prove, don’t you, “attorney”? 😀

          Fact is, the nature of your comments here — the way you consistently miss points, the sablay logic you exhibit, the elementary school grammar you use in your writing — constitutes the basis for the small “a” and the big “P” in the salutations you receive here. If you want to extend the basis of these responses to you to include your case portfolio (something that, until now, has remained outside of the domain of the exchange), well, that’s your prerogative of course, pathetic as that exercise of your prerogative might be.

        4. You engaged in-name calling yet you consider it not an insult… You can just say I missed the point but you have to regurgitate your abogado de patola narrative like an old-broken record. I post arguments if i missed your point you can plainly point where i missed it sans the insult. I have never called you wannabe-social genius who was fortunate to be the only one awake when the good Lord ditributed talents to the world.

          Seriously, Benign0, have you finished your college degree and from where?

      2. He didn’t “stalk” Treyvon (which I won’t refer to as “victim”), he was following him to keep track of him, which isn’t against the law. This is to make sure this potential burglar (according to the profile of the suspects that come around the area, who apparently are always wearing hoodies) won’t get away, likely in reaction to all the burglaries that happened in that particular neighborhood, and how they were able to get away before the police arrives. One can speculate that he was ambushed at this point, due to the damage Zimmerman received, while Treyvon doesn’t have any bruises on him from any altercation (save for the fatal shot). This means at this point, Zimmerman didn’t have his gun drawn, and Treyvon just physically overwhelmed him, and likely out of panic and desperation, Zimmerman had to draw his gun and shoot when the opportunity arises while he was being pounded on the sidewalk.

        This wouldn’t have been put to trial in the first place, as according to law, this was self-defense, and self-defense cases like these in Florida wouldn’t have gone to trial. It’s only because of the media provocation that the people demanded a trial. Following the book, of course Zimmerman was not guilty, and this was according to Florida law – no shenanigans there.

        There wouldn’t be a trial at all if the races were switched, if it was black on white, black on black, or white on white. The media and the kneejerk public reaction had overblown this typical self-defense case into a racial thing.

        Funny to mention that there’s little to no evidence that Zimmerman is racist, despite how the media wants to make him one due to fact cherry-picking and the fact that they used Zimmerman’s mug shot and have it contrasted to Treyvon’s pictures as a 12 year old (they never used his recent pictures where he’s smoking weed and he’s showcasing illegally acquired guns). Why Zimmerman is not a racist? Because of this:

        People are crying for justice, when justice was truly served without bias this time around. People are also making this racial, when it’s not.

        1. I am not making this a racial issue.. It is right or wrong… I have watched the televised for two weeks so my basis of saying that the acquittal was in error was based on the evidence on trial.

          some people see the race issue, but i do not.. it is purely a right or wrong issue.

        2. Even if it were just a right or wrong issue, according to the law Zimmerman was on the right, which led to his acquittal.

          As for the issue with the dispatcher, Zimmerman was suggested not to follow, but not ordered to (“you don’t have to follow…” excerpt). Take note that this is a dispatcher, not a cop, whom Zimmerman was on the phone with. With that, according to evidence and testimonies, Zimmerman is not guilty of breaking any law. A lot of what’s “right” or “wrong” beyond what’s presented in court is pure speculation and should have no bearing at all.

          Let prison be a place for those who are actually guilty, not those who did everything right according to the law.

      3. Our “jury system is flawed”? OJ won an acquittal because 1) the prosecution screwed-up the case and 2) there was plenty of “reasonable doubt”! Our system is flawed? Zimmeran was charged, tried and acquitted already! Meanwhile in the Philippines the Maguindanao Massacre trail is still in pre-trail! Our system is flawed? What happened to the Filipinos who beat to death a US Marine near Rockwell? Those bastards have yet to see the inside of a courtroom let alone a jail cell! Our system is flawed? I just watched a group of cops (in Davao) murder a suspect in broad daylight! Get Real dude! Your logic is FLAWED! Much like the case against the LAPD Officers in the Rodney King beating, Zimmerman is not the one who should have stood trail for this! The State of Florida and the “Stand Your Ground” Law should have been on trail! But that’s an issue better discussed with INTELLIGENT thinkers…

        1. heheehe .. you don’t even know the stand your ground rules. even if you knew it, the measure of self-defense is “reasonable fear of imminent injury to life.” he stalked, he confronted the victim, he is armed. in no way that he entertains imminent injury to life because he was prepared for it. he armed himself.

        2. heheheeee… please don’t go that route.. you will be red on your face all over.

          who annihilated the native indians from virginia, arizona, kentucky all the way to the appalachian mountains… 🙂

        3. @jcc … Whatever dude. I can see by each and everyone of your comments here that you are confused. Your lack of intellect is only matched by your complete lack of focus and maturity. I’ll go whatever route I choose with you… Give up now son. Your arms are way too short to box with me!

        4. And apparently the bogus “attorney” jcc knows even less about “reasonable fear of imminent injury to life.” The point of contention was whether at the time of the shooting Zimmerman felt he was in fear for his life. The acquittal shows the jury made the distinction that when a person is being straddled and pummeled by another physically more powerful individual, his head being bashed against concrete sidewalk — as Zimmerman was — that person may well fear “imminent injury to [his] life” and is justified to use any means at his disposal to protect himself. Even if he brought along the instrument which he eventually used to protect himself.

        5. dude, if only you watch what is happening now, you will see the public divided on the verdict.

          your point being half of the american public are not intelligent…:)

    2. Chris, say also your words to those American people who are now rallying all across the nation!

      You talk about American culture, as if the Philippines were not colonized (and still being influenced the GI Joe’s) and taught (brain-washed) by the Americans to be “civilized”!

      You talk about laws! Yet I do not know whether you know that nearly half of Philippines laws are cloned from US laws! Number one is the Constitution!

      This case in particular? Very simple! It is just a case of that so-called stupid “Stand Your Ground” brouhaha!

      By the way, your Obama is spying on you! Do ask Mr. Eric Snowden and the NSA!

      1. It doesn’t matter if Philippine law is derived from American law. Being thousands of miles away, almost opposite sides of the world, as well as the cultural context that differentiates American and Filipino life makes the environment of law quite different between the Philippines and the US.

        Not that it matters, because according to the law, Zimmerman would be rightfully acquitted. So long as there’s no shenanigans and the law was truly followed, Zimmerman would be acquitted in both the American justice system and that of the Philippines’.

        If you want to go as far as colonization and law, we have inherited some of the laws during the times of Spanish occupation, which are heavily influenced by the Roman Catholic church – way different from that of the non-Catholic American history of law, so from that argument, we’re still significantly different from how America does things in their laws and constitutions.

        1. “The jury system,” Mark Twain famously observed, “puts a ban upon intelligence and honesty, and a premium upon ignorance, stupidity, and perjury.” “I desire to tamper with the jury law,” Twain continued, “to so alter it as to put a premium on intelligence and character, and close the jury box against idiots, blacklegs, and people who do not read newspapers” (pp.57-58).
          Mark Twain is an Amerian.


          Yes, Americans apply things differently….

        2. “Professor Mark Findlay of Sydney University, did a study of jurors for the Australian Institute of Judicial Administration, In Jury Management in NSW (1994), he reported that he had access to a diary kept by a woman juror during a long trial. On the firs day, a majority decided that the accused must be guilty because he wore an earring; he looked too glitzy; he was ugly and hence proably bad; and his lawyer looked positively evil. During the trial, the majority, led by a handsome banker ‘only listened to evidence or argument which reinforced their conclusion of guilt.’ The woman was bullied and onstracized, described as a ‘pinko lezzo,’ and threatened with being put on a hit list if she went against a guilty verdict. The verdict was eventually decided by a golf appointment. On the last day, the banker, expecting an early result, arranged to play golf, but ‘when it became clear that the [woman and another juror] were not going to. go along with a guilty verdict,’ he changed his mind and was followed by the rest.” (Serial Liars, Get The Money and Get the Criminals Off, Evan Whitton).

        3. US Chief Justice (1969-86) Warren Burger told the American Bar Association in 1984:

          “Trials by adversarial contest (meaning jury trial) must in time go the way the ancient trial by battle and blood. Our system is too costly, too painful too destructive, too inefficient for a truly civilized people.” (Serial Liars, Get The Money and Get The Criminals Off, Evan Whitton)

        4. @jcc A classic threaten the witness or jury. Happens all the time when there’s no proper protection, so what’s your point? Anyone can be bought off and threatened? If anything, the jury are more in danger if they commit to a “not guilty” verdict, especially with the riots that are going on right now here in LA.

          So you don’t want juries anymore? How about we get rid of the judges and lawyers and just lynch whoever is accused, guilty or not guilty? That seems the be where your point seems to be going.

        5. maybe because of the soap opera drama, the money that comes with it (lawyers fee, book deals), entertainment.. 🙂

        6. Justice Burger proposed an investigative judicial system, maybe like one in RP where Judge decides, but as I said in my very first post, both can screw up big time…

          Systems are imperfect… But to say that justice has been served to Trayvon Martin is a stretch….

        7. Not to mention there are difference between State and Federal laws. (I practice tax and the two types of laws makes compliance a bit tricky.)

        8. You were citing Federal Law or Florida Law? What is determinative in this case is the Florida Law, you called “Stand Your Ground.”

          But it has its roots from common law which protects you from your home, if invaded, you have to repel the invasion by reasonable force. That if the burglar simply wants to rob, you cannot shot him. But this principle was outdated, and recent decisions make it possible to ‘stand your ground’ and shoot the burglar. There is no necessity that you have to be pummeled first before you can fight back.

          So the premise is that the attack was made on one’s house. Is Florida law stretches it up to the public place (street)?

          But the commonalities between common law and the ‘stand your ground’ (florida law) is that there should be a reasonable belief of imminent injury to person and that the force applied by the defender is commensurate to the aggression.

          “reasonable belief” uses a prudent person standard. it should not be whimsical.

          His injury was inconsistent with his claim that his head was bashed several times on the pavement to justify his claim of self-defense. It is a case of two people doing mano-a-mano but the other guy bought a gun.

        9. “Putting a premium to ignorance” according to Mark Twain….

          In Michigan, the juror is paid $40 a day for jury service. I would say that across the States the pay would less than the average minimum wage a rank-and-file would receive. If you were receiving more than what a juror is being paid, you will always find excuse to avoid the service. Thus it is safe to say that when called for jury duty, these people can always find an excuse not to render it.

          The first question ask: “Have you read the newspaper about this case? Have you watched the television about this case, heard it from radio?

          If you were the guy who is receiving $50 a day, you will say, yes.. then boom.. you are excused.

          If the judge won’t excuse you but propounded another question, “of your reading, watching about the case, have you formed an opinion about it?

          The guy receiving $50 a day, would say yes? Boom, you are excused.

          So who are the likely candidates for the jury? The unemployed, those who do not read newspapers, watched TV and listen to their radios, and most likely have no internet in their homes. And do you think people who do not read newspapers, watch TV, listen to the radio, surf the internet are very smart people?

          You can find one or two jurors who are not within the category of people i have mentioned, but the majority, as Mark Twain aptly observe, are “idiots.”

        10. Jack for your information, a lot of Philippine laws are also derived from Spanish laws, specifically Criminal Law, Revised Penal Code or Codigo Penal!

          In the end, it doesn’t really matter what the hell is the source of the law, the ultimate question is: is it just?

          In the case at bar, is that utterly stupid so-called “stand your ground” thing a just and fair law?

          That is the point!

          If the answer is in the affirmative, then I say: Welcome to the bloody wild, wild west! Bang, bang, boom, boom, boom! Hiyyyaaahhhh! Bwahahahaha!!!

        1. Go ahead, Jim, that is your prerogative! Show your being preposterous and highlight your stupidity of the highest order to the whole world!

        2. @ Jose
          No its your ignorance of the US justice system when Stand Your Ground was not part of this case and the progressive media hyping the case to race bait. In the US when two people have an altercation and one is killed and one lives and claims self defense with no witnesses they are not arrested. My comment stands that you can hype anything to cause protest but I guess with your high education in Philosophy you failed to see the that point.

      2. Jose – The US colonized The Philippines for a mere 50 or so years. The Filipino mindset and culture is based more on the efforts of the Spanish for over 300 years.

        I realize that the Philippine constitution is based on the US Constitution, however the interpretation and implementation is not the same plus numerous Republic Acts have changed the laws of the land to suit the wants and desires of those in charge at the time.

        I do not see “Stand Your Ground” as something that even needs to be legislated. I see it as a human right to protect yourself, one the government should not have to weigh in on. However, due to those that believe that a person has the right to accost someone without some form of retribution, these laws were created to further clarify that human right to protect yourself when someone attacks you. What did people do before laws were written? They stood their ground. Somebody won, somebody lost.

        I am fully aware that my government is watching me. Snowden’s leaks were not a revelation, but merely a confirmation of what a lot of people already knew has been going on since the cold war.

        Yes, “my” Obama is spying on me. If only he would take the cue of your “Aquino” and play video games all day, the world would be a better place.

        1. The world will be a better place without those stupid laws, if there is true and genuine social, global justice and without imperialism!

          Regards to Barack (hope he won’t succeed in getting Eric) and to Eric (hope he will find a safe refuge)!

  4. This case has been so over blown. Everyday I can give you examples of innocent unarmed whites being killed by Blacks and they don’t get the press this did. The jury has spoken end of story. What I find preposterous are the gun laws that allow things like this to happen to begin with. Look at all the massacres that happened in the past year by insane lone gunman at schools, movie theaters, etc…all in states with liberal gun laws. Why does a constitution have to be so firm. They managed to screw one up here in the Philippines big time. This is without a doubt the most screwed up Country I have ever seen and you should know you write about it everyday.Things are meant to be changed and gun laws should as well. less guns will equal less crime. Pure common sense. As for Zimmerman. You would have to be in his shoes to know how to react as he did. The jury has spoken. End of story.

    1. Look at The shootings in Chicago on any given weekend – Black on Black, Completely ignored by Al, Jesse, and Barry. Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the US. Criminals do not pay attention to laws. The only people disarmed by gun laws are citizens that obey them.

      1. But I am thinking that is gang violence or drug related and not so much against innocents. No matter as I am still for taking away guns from the public except for hunting using rifles and target shooting in which case guns stay at the range but, this is a whole other win less debate in itself.

        1. You are right Corey, it is mostly gang and or drug related, however innocent children die in the crossfire every day. Gun control is a major issue that will never go away because of the 2nd amendment. Back to the article and the open letter to Obama, The President acted presidential and his statement helped maintain order directly after the verdict. Can you imagine if he would have repeated “If I had a son…” again? Lots of people have forgotten about Rodney king and the 53 people that died from the rioting in the aftermath of the verdict.

        2. Innocents do die, not only in the crossfire, but intentional targets from gang members willing to go take things to another level, which is way worse than death due to self-defense. There was supposed to be this five and seven year old black kids that died from being shot in Chicago, but where can you find that in the news right now? We don’t even know their names, shows how the media values which life they find more valuable to present as news.

          As for gun laws, Chicago has very strict gun laws, so it’s incredibly difficult for a citizen to own a gun there. But how come they have an extremely rates for shooting-related crime, to the point where it’s a lot more dangerous to the point where a lot more people die in Chicago each year than in Afghanistan and Iraq. But do criminals follow gun laws? Doesn’t matter how strict the gun laws are, criminals will always be able to buy their guns illegally, while citizens are completely helpless and unarmed, prime to be murdered, assaulted, raped, etc.

          Also doesn’t help that those who are weak, young or disabled would have no chance against these young gangbangers on the streets, having to wait for the police – the only people who are required to have a gun – to come save them, which can take minutes to half an hour to arrive. If your loved ones is in danger of being raped, wouldn’t you have wanted them to have a gun so that they have a chance to protect themselves?

        3. You want to take away guns from the public. The first ones to lay down their guns would be those who own guns legally and fully documented, hardly the ones who commit crimes. You do realize that there are gunsmiths here in the Philippines who can make you a gun for cheap, no documents required? And these loose firearms are the ones used for committing crimes here. Effectively, what you will be doing is removing the honest guy’s defense and giving the criminal the upper hand. Good luck with that.

  5. Racism eh?

    I think that Zimmerman did, in a way, racially profile Martin but this is not without basis as the recent crimes in their neighborhood were perpetrated by black teens. So I believe that he is not simply a racist, he’s just reacting to his current predicament.

    I believe their own media has spun this to look like a big racist man against a small black kid, even labeling Zimmerman as a “White Hispanic”. This is the first time I’ve heard of the term. And actual racists from both sides took the bait resulting in this fiasco.

    1. Nobody says those words “White Hispanic” put together. He is mixed though. According to Wikipedia, his father is white of German descent while his mother is Peruvian.

      People think that this whole case is about racism.

    2. Martin while speaking on the phone just before the incident said that Zimmerman was a “Creepy Ass Cracker” . now what part of that being a racist statement are you not understanding” The woman on the phone then said maybe Zimmerman is a Gay Rapist and he, martin should run. Instead Marin decided to take matters into his own hands and paid with his life for this misjudgement

      1. I certainly did not know about that statement until now. Funny how the “racially oppressed” kid may have been the actual racist in this case.

        Putting that into perspective, looks like the media had spun the story of a fat man attacked by a racist black kid into the story of a muscled racist “white hispanic” man killing an innocent black kid.

        Gotta hand it to the media, they’ve once again showed their power of persuasion.

  6. Reading this article, I had to stop, scroll to the top and check who wrote this. Oh! Its you. Of course! As usual, you have completely missed the point. Most notably, the job of the President of the United States. Are you suggesting that President Obama should incite civil disobedience and/or violence just because of the verdict? The United States is NOT the Philippines dude! Stick to writing about the Philippines dude! When it comes to US Law, the duties of a given US President and the Race issue therein, you have absolutely NO idea what you’re talking about!

    As an African American, I say this… Keep your so-called “solidarity”. We don’t need it!

    1. Nobody needs you also!

      You talked about “we”, which “we” are you referring to? The African side or the American side?

      Are you referring to those people who are outraged by the outcome of this case and rallying across the nation?

      Who are those people? Are you not part of them too?

      Stick to writing about the Philippines, Dude?

      You, why don’t you stick to Africa? Or, to America?

      I am not an African-American like you, but an international revolutionary, a citizen of the world!

      I have no idea of what I am talking about? Wow! You, what idea do you have?

      Talk to Mr. Eric Snowden; probably, the guy may give you some shocking ideas!

      Okay, dude?

      1. OK, so you don’t like the verdict. Your not alone. GZ killed the kid and, IMO should have been convicted of manslaughter.
        BUT, you condemm things that are beyond the scope of the incident. It was not a FEDERAL case and the President has to accept the fact that the STATE of Florida indicted the man, put him on trial and a jury of his peers found him innocent.

        CASE CLOSED, that is it.
        Anyone who lives in the USA and has taken even a POLY-SCI 101 knows what I just stated, IDK if you do. At any rate, its just TOUGH SHIT on anyone who doesn’t like it(including the author!).
        I would also doubt if the case had a ‘tainted’ or otherwise manipulated jury. Un-like the CJS in the Philippines (where convicted felons become Senators/congressmen) the USA remains pretty solid in its ‘process’ and guarantees all a fair trial.
        The author is a citizen of the Philippines, yes?if so, remember: You live in a GLASS HOUSE and should refrain from throwing stones.
        Citizen of the World, huh? tell that to immigration when you step off any international flight out of the Philippines. You will be turned around and sent home…and all the while laughed at.

        1. God ain’t good all of the time. In fact, sometimes, God is not for us. As a black woman in a nation that has taken too many pains to remind me that I am not a white man, and am not capable of taking care of my reproductive rights, or my voting rights, I know that this American god ain’t my god. As a matter of fact, I think he’s a white racist god with a problem. More importantly, he is carrying a gun and stalking young black men. — excerpts from Professor Anthea Butler’s blog post saying that the George Zimmerman verdict helps support the notion that the “American god” is a “white racist god.”


      2. So many so-called “revolutionaries” that we don’t actually need. And a lot of people who are outraged over the verdict are rioting in LA right now, beating people up and jacking up cars. Concentrate on the nonsense back home before putting one’s nose on someone else’s business.

        1. God ain’t good all of the time. In fact, sometimes, God is not for us. As a black woman in a nation that has taken too many pains to remind me that I am not a white man, and am not capable of taking care of my reproductive rights, or my voting rights, I know that this American god ain’t my god. As a matter of fact, I think he’s a white racist god with a problem. More importantly, he is carrying a gun and stalking young black men. — excerpts from Professor Anthea Butler’s blog post saying that the George Zimmerman verdict helps support the notion that the “American god” is a “white racist god.”


    1. You are wrong about that winky. People in Oakland, California turned violent for Christ’s sake. They were mad because Zimmerman was found not guilty. They were protesting alright but they tend to take it too far. They even burned the American flag. How do I know this? I watched the news early this morning.

  7. Innocent until proven guilty. The prosecutors initially didn’t want to pursue a weak case but thanks to the sensationalist media and grievance mongers, they went and overdid it with a second degree murder charge; and I thought only “Pinoys” were the emotional type.

    Fact of the matter is, if you’re going for murder, you ought to be sure you can prove malice. The prosecutors didn’t. The evidence shows there was a struggle and witness accounts saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman beating his head. That fact alone, that there was a fight instead of an outright shooting, makes murder extremely difficult to prove.

    I am disturbed that this writer could so easily dismiss Zimmerman as a “bastard” racist without considering the facts or the possibility that he might not be a racist. He was a neighborhood watchman. Trayvon was wearing a hood, circling a neighborhood he didn’t even live in which multiple burglaries have already occurred. How about being a little more reasonable instead of jumping the gun and assuming it was all about race.

    We are all Trayvon Martin? What a fitting slogan to express one’s incapability of individual thought. Keep emotions out of it. Justice was served.

      1. We are neither. We have our own Identities and that is one thing that makes the USA #1. it is not a perfect place and it sux that the GZ’s of this world do what they do and get away with it.
        Manslaughter was called for here,IMO.but it did not happen.
        4 the record predjudice has reared its ugly head in my face/life on many occasions. I did not like it, BUT I overcame it, not by killing someone but by PERSEVERANCE.

  8. This writer has a Law degree? Really?

    Then he ought to know that if you’re going to charge someone with murder, you need to prove malice and intent to kill. The prosecution didn’t. In fact, if Zimmerman was a murderer, why did he even cal 911? Why did he even approach Trayvon? Why was there a fight in which Trayvon ended up on top beating Zimmerman’s skull into the concrete pavement?

    That fact alone, that there was a fight, makes murder extremely hard to prove. Sounds to me like the prosecutors got a little to overexcited by the media hype machine and overcharged.

    Innocent until proven guilty. Proof beyond reasonable doubt. You don’t need me to tell you this.

    1. according to the jury there was no intent, but intent is a state of mind… you arrived at intent by taking into consideration antecedent facts: stalking, profiling, suspecting, contact initiation… those are markers of intent.

      1. I wonder what Trayvor’s state of mind was when he was stalking Zimmerman, and when he was on top of him bashing his head to the ground.

      1. Somebody who was presenting himself as a Suspicious Ghetto Thug, in a gated community that he did not live in, gets profiled as a criminal – buhuhu

      2. Trayvon fits the profile of the people that burglarize the homes there. The hypocrisy here is that people keep complaining about the profiling thing, but everyone profiles – it’s just that not everyone are willing to admit it. And the social stigma of admitting to profiling makes it difficult to be honest with it.

        But it was the police dispatcher that asked to “profile” the suspicious individual anyway, and NBC’s blatant edit made Zimmerman’s exchange with the dispatcher seem racist. Google search “zimmerman call NBC edit”.

        1. You ask him… But if you ask me for my opinion, he did not plan to murder but onlly to arrest him because he is a criminal. During his ‘attempted arrest’ the fellow fought back. There was a scuffle. Defense said his head was bashed several times to the pavement, but injuries of 1 and 2 cm at the back of the head were inconsistent with head bashing at the pavement several times. That blood oozed from these superficial injuries was explained by the Doctor’s PA, the scalp being vascular (meaning it has too many blood vessels) bleeding can easily occur.

          He shot him claiming self-defense. If you want my opinion, he is guilty of manslaugther.. Use of force to repel an aggressor must be reasonable, I believe shooting his victim through his heart was unreasonable. Intent is not a requisite of manslaughter..

        2. Were you there to know exactly what happened and can narrate them as facts?

          Or you were just like me who based his “factual reading” of the case on the basis of watching the televised trial?

          BTW, let me continue on Mark Twain’s comment about the ignoramus jury composition.

          In impaneling a jury, the judge asks: “having read/watched/browsed the case on newspapers, tv, and internet, have you formed an opinion about the case?

          If your answer is no. You are okay, you get to be a juror. But who in the world who after watching the annotations of Fox Anchors/Guests or CNN’s would not be able to form an opinion about the case? So you must have some problem processing a highly charged murder trial which makes you a liability in the jury box.

          But if you did already form an opinion about the case but yet you want to be a juror you will say that you didn’t form an opinion about the case.

          Here you have an opinionated juror who was also a pathological liar. 🙂

    2. hohohuum.. why are non-lawyers, like the jurors seem to be conversant with the law when actually they don’t know about the law.

      the instruction is murder or manslaughter. one requires intent the other only reckless misappreciation of the danger resulting to ‘incomplete self-defense.’

      1. Reckless misappreciation of the danger? Hahahaha. Yup, when Trayvor was on top of him and bashing his head on the ground, Zimmerman should have just waited for poor boy Trayvor to either get tired or be struck with a sudden onset of compassion.

        1. That, or having Trayvon discover Zimmerman has a gun, and steal it from him. What’s another illegally acquired gun to add to Trayvon’s own personal collection? Right next to weed and some ghetto homemade drugs and some lean.

    3. So, what is your point, Tank?

      My sole issue with regard to this issue is the legality and the constitutionality of that so-called “stand your ground” brouhaha!

      You? What degree or degrees you’ve finished?

      Or probably, you just finished having your meal! Is that it?

      1. @Jose,

        Obviously your degrees didn’t help because Stand Your Ground was not part of this case. The statute was refused as a defense and Zimmerman had to use self defense as grounds for innocence not Stand Your Ground. This trail at best should have been only simple Manslaughter but should have never been brought to trail since there was not enough evidence to convict on anything. BTW a Black man shot and killed a White man and used the Stand Your Ground defense and was not arrested. Your Progressive views cloud any of your legal training. The ends justify the means as the Progressives mantra is why it is such a flawed political view. You claim to understand the law but ignore it simply because you don’t like it. There is not to my knowledge any part of the Stand Your Ground law that is unconstitutional so live with. If Florida wants to change the laws then they should elect people to the government who will and until that time that is how it works. As for Zimmerman being a “White Hispanic” the President is also “Half White” so your argument there is not justified. All you points in this article are meant to please your Progressive Masters but all that comes out is revisionist history and deeply flawed arguments.

        1. @ Jim Arndt, yes I agree. it seems the author of this essay doesn’t like the ‘stand your ground law’ and/or the result of the verdict in this trial. And so attacks it on what seem emotional grounds. The author claims to be a ‘citizen of the world’ but what passport he has will dictate what citizenship he possess’s. No matter what he likes to think, it just is not so…and I am a New York YANKEE, u kno? LOL!

        2. @jcc

          Like I said what is your point. Stand Your Ground was not part of the defense like Manslaughter was not part of the prosecution. The Judge added both at the end of the trail.

        3. The instruction to convict GZ for manslaughterif it warants it was proper. Meaning GZ can be convicted of it even if he was orginally charged with murder because it is under the criminal principle of “lesser included offenses.”

          A lesser crime whose elements are encompassed by a greater crime.

          A lesser included offense shares some, but not all, of the elements of a greater criminal offense. Therefore, the greater offense cannot be committed without also committing the lesser offense. For example, Manslaughter is a lesser included offense of murder, assault is a lesser included offense of rape, and unlawful entry is a lesser included offense of Burglary.

          Hence even if ‘intent was not proven’ the jury can still convict him of manslaughter because this lesser-included offense does not require intent. Bar fights resulting to homicide where intent to kill was not present classifies only the crime as manslaughter.

          But I wish you can comment on the bigger issue that I have pointed out here that the jury being unsophisticated, ignorant and idiots can screw up the process of rendering justice.

          It was an intellectual American Mark Twain who said that.

        4. @Yup, your an idiot of the highest order!

          Attack my arguments, not my personality or background!

          In logic (which I know you don’t know) you are guilty of the fallacy of argumentum ad hominem! Shame on you! Bloody bastard!

        5. @Jose
          You say so but yet you tow the progressive line to the T, therefor your masters dictate the talking points which just regurgitate.

      2. Regardless of what constitutes as covered by the “stand your ground” law, nobody’s going to spend a minute to think when their face are getting bashed in and their had smashed on the concrete. I’d bet anyone’s only thought when they’re at the receiving end of it is what they will do to survive.

        Me, and I feel a lot of people would draw their gun and shoot when being assaulted, beaten to the point where there’s a fear of death, paralysis, or extensive brain damage for getting their face broken.

        1. his injuries were inconsistent with his claim. ‘several head bashing on the pavement’, before he shot… he could be in coma if that was true..

          so my theory, he was punched by TM, because he was suspected to be a mugger, (after TM noticed that he was being followed) fell down, hit is head to some stones in the grass causing 1 cm and 2 cm wounds on his scalp… doctor assistant said bleeding was due to the highly vascular nature of the scalp, but pointed out that the injuries were sueperficial. doctor did not consider subjecting him to further medical tests because he was coherent and his physical appearance would not indicate any sign of serious injury. he was advised to go to his doctor for further evaluation, but he did not go to his doctor. you can only conclud that his head was not bashed several times to the pavement.

    4. apaarently you did need to tell him that. His degree in law is not from a University in the USA. The law ,obviously, is not the same in different countries.

  9. The problem with this case is that lots of things were not “caught on camera.” It’s like this story I got from my former colleague Arnel Endrinal. He watched a video wherein a man was arrested, handcuffed and made to lay facedown on the car. Then all of a sudden, the policeman took his baton and started beating up the suspect. At first glance, it would look like police brutality. But you have to know the whole story before you make a judgement.

    Explanation: the suspect grabbed the balls of the policeman while he was leaning over the car. So the policeman uses force to try and make the suspect release his balls. It’s not easily seen in the video, unless you hear out the other side.

    It’s difficult when people base their opinions on not getting the whole story. On the Zimmerman/Martin case, it seems even the police and court are unable to get the whole story, and base their understanding on the calls and what they saw. Seems there really was little evidence to convict Zimmerman.

    Would things probably be different if Big Brother were real?

    1. When it’s that doubtful, all the more reason to acquit.

      I hope Big Brother won’t ever happen. A surveillance state is a whole new problem.

    2. In the end, when in doubt, check the facts. Facts don’t lie, and that’s what the trial was based on, leading to the “Not Guilty” verdict.

  10. Here is a thought experiment.

    Lets say Zimmerman did not have a gun and Travon was able to continue beating him. The police were already on the way there. After beating Zimmerman Trayvon leaves and the police then track down Trayvon and arrest him for assault. Zimmerman was beat to a point that he has permanent damage (which happens quite often in a beat down) physical and mental. Now that would be a cut and dry case to send Trayvon to jail. The case is only because Zimmerman had a gun. BTW gun control does not work just so you know that I am not against guns just stating that this out come would have been very different if Zimmerman had no gun.

    1. That’s a really big assumption that Zimmerman would have just been knocked out like he was in boxing match.

      A Thug was able to overpower you and is beating your head on the pavement, you really would think everything’s gonna be A OK?

    1. Yep, fuck him. and the millions just like him. Un-fortunately, the way things are going the civil rights that are available to all U.S. citizens are being eroded and cases like this are making it worse.

  11. FL Statute 776.041 
    Use of force by aggressor.
    —The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
    (1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
    (2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
    (a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
    (b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
    History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102.

    The only thing that matters is whether or not he was in imminent danger of great bodily harm or death.

    Evidence shows he was on the bottom getting pummeled by GZ right before he shot the gun.

    The defense did not invoke stand your ground, please look up common law on self defense-which is pretty much all they needed .

    The jury got it right to a tee based on the text of the statutes.

    Mr. Abogado, please go pass the BAR exam.

    1. Correction:
      Evidence showed GZ was being pummeled by Treyvon right before he pulled the trigger. GZ face was all messed up while Treyvon had no markings other than the gunshot wound.

      1. and a FATAL wound it was. Trayvon decided to beat the crap out of a ‘Cracker-ass’ white guy, and came up CRAPS in his bid to roll the dice. He should have kept walking or running. GZ should be in jail on a manslaughter rap is just my opinion. The verdict doesn’t surprise me. Especially in florida.

        1. Imagine this scenario its slightly different:

          You are in your home, then you peep out your window and you see a teenager peeping through windows.

          2 weeks ago there was a burglary in which the teen you see outside the window fits the profile: in terms of race, mannerism and demographic.

          You decide to go out of the safety of your home to follow the guy.

          You ask him aggressively “What are you doing, you’re not supposed to be here?”

          He throws a looping left hook to your chin, mounts your chest, starts pounding your head into the pavement.

          You pull out your concealed firearm.

          Shoot the guy on top of you and he dies.

          Manslaughter? Because he profiled based on historical events.

          Self Defense? Because he was under imminent fear of great bodily harm or death.

        2. @Commbuzz…w-w-w-w-what? that is NOT WHAT HAPPENED! GZ was told to stay away from the kid and ended up getting his ass kicked. Lucky for him he had a weapon.
          I don’t like ‘thugs’ and ‘gangsta’s’ any more than I like jock itch, BUT these neighborhood watch people acting like cops and killing people w/skittles and tea in their possession are out of control. its just bull-shit that he can do what he did and not get a manslaughter rap up his ass.
          GZ had no right to act like he did, and I do not like the Trayvon Martins of this world, and I absolutely despise his complete bitch-ass hate filled girlfriend. I am not a racist either, I HATE EVERYONE EQUALLY! the GZ’s of this world should leave policing to the cops.
          if GZ had followed me, he is the one who would have been shot.

  12. I’m not saying thats what happened. I made a completely fictional story, I just want to know, in the scenario i have. Would it have been self defense or manslaughter.

  13. Neighborhood watch people acting like cops? like when defending oneself from imminent death or serious bodily harm with a big scawy gun? puhleeze.

    Trayvor got himself killed, good riddance.

    1. no winky, by arming themselves and patrolling their neighborhoodsike vigilante’s. that is the cops job.and neighborhood watchers are not supposed to confront anyone either, the cops do.
      so winky, do you live in the USA? do you know what a neighborhood watch is?
      I do not miss the Trayvon Martin’s of this world for a single second. and your right he did get himself killed by someone who should be doing 5-15 yrs. in a state correctional facility for manslaughter. that is just my opinion.GZ did not need to do what he did, could have done numerous other things too, lucky for him he had a piece in his pocket. I never said GZ was dumb. if he had done it to me, which he would not have done coz I do not look like a thug/gangsta, he is the one who would have been shot. Not me!

      1. No Gerry, law abiding citizens have the right to arm themselves. Their gated community, their neighborhood, their right to “patrol”. Police officers will solve a crime after the fact. If you choose to cower and hide from thugs like trayvor and hope that a big scawy police officer will come in with a big scawy gun to protect you, thats your right too. Graham WA, and no I don’t. My neighboors and I would have been all over him, guns already drawn so yea, piece of shit trayvor would have lived.

        1. “The humorist who invented trial by jury played a colossal practical joke upon the world, but since we have the system we ought to try and respect it. A thing which is not thoroughly easy to do, when we reflect that by command of the law a criminal juror must be an intellectual vacuum, attached to a melting heart and perfectly macaronian bowels of compassion.”

          The six jurors in GZ case attached sympathy on the handsome Hispanic criminal and consider the black guy a thug… 🙂

          Just like some commenters here for intellectual vacuity, consider the verdict a triump of justice instead of its travesty!


        2. @winkydu(?) R u the person the comment was aimed at OR are you just butting into an argument? I did not say that people do not have the right to arm themselves. Even though in places like NYC it is impossible to do so.
          Take what I said out of context and puff up your chest and win an argument that did not exist and see if I give a shit?
          Based on the totality of the case I believe that GZ acted above the law, had no reasonable right to do so and should have gotten a manslaughter rap hung on his ass. That kid may have been a thug, IDK, BUT He was on his way home w/a bag of fucking skittles. GZ thinks he is doing the cops job and sticks his nose where it does not belong and starts getting his ass kicked. tough shit GZ, should have stayed the fuck home. BUT Then,it turns out that GZ has a piece in his pocket and he fuckin kills the kid? the kid was minding his own business. Sorry, I don’t like the Trayvons of this world, BUT GZ should be in jail. its my opinion. he profiled the kid and should have minded his own business they both would have been better off and the country would have been too.

  14. “I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its
    constitution.” –Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Paine, 1789.

    “If the question [before justices of the peace] relate to any point of public liberty, or if it be one of those in which the judges may be suspected of bias, the jury undertake to decide both law and fact.” –Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia, 1782.

    “Representative government and trial by jury are the heart and lungs of liberty. Without them we have no other fortification against being ridden like horses, fleeced like sheep, worked like cattle, and fed and clothed like swine and hounds” John Adams, 1774

    1. The sentiments of T. Jefferson and J. Adams were echoed circa 1780 where the institutions of government of the colonies freed from the British empire were just geling. It was then glamorous to be part of the government and jury system is part of that gelling institution.

      It was then considered a patriotic duty to render jury service. Jury duty attracted unbiased local folks with patriotic wisdom.
      It was then a period without global media networks and internet. You could practically impanel a jury at that time whose memberships do not hold any opinion on the issue but were sophisticated enough to sift through the rubbles of lies and propaganda.

      Mark Twain is from the 1900s. He saw how the jury evolved from an ideal adjunct of a complex dedicated to the rendition of justice to an unmanageable monstrosity today that attracts only the bums, the most ignorant, the most unsophisticated thinkers. To be a member of a jury now, you must not be a reader of current events and like a horse carrying a carriage, you must blind yourself of the events around you. People who do that today, in the light of mass media sleuthing of every major crimes in the country are loonies. So somehow, a jury now have members with bias depending on which TV network they are tuned to, otherwise they are all loonies.

      If a juror who put a veil on your formed opinion about the case in order to be in the jury box, no amount of forceful argument from one side could sway you from that formed opinion already considering the other lawyer (either prosecution or defense) was also on your side reinforcing that already formed bias.

      Additionally, Americans got tired of their politics, their leaders and their government and were more cynical as the future unravels. Jury duty, being the smaller scale of government participation, no longer attracts folks imbued with folk wisdom, to them it is no longer patriotic to be part of a jury. It becomes, as what Mark Twain said a box of “ idiots and ignorant.”

      Just like when RP was under the tutelage of the Americans for self-government. Filipinos were excited to be part of that ‘gelling’ government and hope to be of service to the Filipinos when the Americans finally leave. The government attracted local talents and patriots in the likes of Quezon, Laurel, Recto, Sumulong, Tanada and others.

      Decades later, Filipinos grew cynical. Talented and patriotic people shun the government and would rather be in the private sector or emigrate. The government no longer attracts the patriots in us, the most talented — it now attracts movie stars, basketball players, boxers, jueteng lords or plain and simple criminals.

        1. Is this not about the whole theme of GRP? That only the smart must lead and only the smart must choose their leaders?

  15. With mindset lack this… I can say you travel from point A-B in air-conditioned luxury vehicle and don’t require the need for any human interaction other than at the office or some other well planed out event, while a few of us enjoy walking or biking in the general public only to get held up or attacked with a knife or beaten to death with fists on concrete. Thinking like this spawns movies like “Dirty Harry” the public is sick of being persecuted by those that want their goods, their lively hood and hard work, or even worse rape for women. Simple conversation is not allowed with some minorities they become enraged over simple questions and will push you into oncoming rail system or stab you and go out for a burger and fries. Anytime I took a detour or wrong turn I was challenged in a minority neighborhood within seconds and even beaten and robbed, still alive and packing now, you need to get out of your 1970’s box and join 2013, this kind of thinking don’t cut it anymore tough guy with no gun.

    1. U kno Mc, you have a good point. The minorities in the USA hate ‘whitey’. I’ve experienced the same shit you just mentioned, if your white and stray into the wrong neighborhood…you fucked! but it is the same way w/ the Trayvons of this world. the most racist country in the world has answered Rodney Kings question:”Can’t we all just get along?”. Well well well Rodney, the answer is obviously NO. too bad/tough shit.

      1. Thinking and laws are way behind the times in the Philippines the bad guys in the US don’t get it so good anymore, they no longer can beat the hell out of police before they can draw their weapons, also if the criminal element is running with a weapon he can be shot in the back, thank God. I was stationed in San Diego, CA and took a wrong turn off the highway driving my Yamaha FZR600 and right away these Mexicans started running at me, I barely made the turn around in the middle the road, didn’t even get to end of the street this was not to far from the 32nd street Naval base. To carry concealed was a priveldge in the US and I miss it, as a foreigner here I don’t think that I can even carry here, only my wife, I guess, wonder if immigrants to the US can own a weapon? We can’t all get along because every race is racist, they just have more clever words on hiding it, for example calling a Westerner or white man a fag, Kano, buckla, baddeng or there are more words I’m finding out, went to the dead happenings here recently and one of the Majong players, my wife was playing also, asked for a light but he used a new term which meant again I’m gay, it’s gettin old and it’s time not to take these nay sayers to seriously they are anti-society and would rather live in warped reality, people are tired of the miniority message. Filming the cops in the US, on your phone the cops could care less, most jury’s won’t convict a cop or citizen from a miniority trouble maker, they’re trouble makers and it’s nothing new, each race behavior is well known they scream, violent outbursts, stealing and taunting others, stab, shoot innocent civilians they act crazy the trouble maker gets 100 bullets lodged in him by the police, he can’t sue anymore for his precious rights and before he committed his current life ending crime his rap sheet is a mile long.

        1. @ Mcalley, ur right YOU can not carry a weapon in the RP, BUT UR wife can. with the death of the guy whose wife is a U.S. embassy diplomat last November 2012 any ‘KANO’ who is in the country should have a weapon VERY close by.
          it does not matter to me what gun laws are in place wherever I am on the planet, I am packing at least a .38 revolver and will use it if threatened with imminent grievous bodily harm. However, I will not go chasing the Trayvon Martins of this world for any reason. that said, they better not try coming in my home.

  16. First of all i have to ask you whether you watched the trial or not. If you did, you can clearly see that the prosecutors sucked hard. and the kid was high as fuck. zimmerman was just defending himself.

  17. By the way i got this from nxpunk from cnn: “Zimmerman got off because of the lack of evidence, and the evidence provided supported Zimmerman’s version of the story. The Jury would have to be 95+% sure that Zimmerman shot Treyvon because of other motives than self defense. Race was never a factor when it went to court.
    Our Judicial system is based on what can be proven in the court of law and not how we feel. Feelings are not evidence. This is not a pro Zimmerman comment, this is a comment to debunk the racist propoganda that seems to be brewing.”

  18. @Gerry, “GZ thinks he is doing the cops job and sticks his nose where it does not belong and starts getting his ass kicked. tough shit GZ, should have stayed the fuck home” —- I say F&ck That.

    GZ was in his own neighborhood, a gated community where he lived in. GZ had every right to “stick his nose” at something that does not seem right or anything suspicious in his own neighborhood.

    GZ was a dumb ass for not announcing he was armed and prepared to shoot, and instead allowed himself to get on a scuffle with this “kid”, GZ just got lucky. TM was more of a dumb ass for going ghetto on GZ.

    In the end, dumb ass GZ still acted, out of sheer dumb luck, in self defense.

    1. @ winky, I am not going to get into a circular argument with you. GZ has the right to protect HIS property, NOT SOMEONE ELSE’s…that is what cops are for. OR even a private security company. if you don’t agree, that’s ur right. I disagree but do not need to curse at you.
      GZ is a vigilante and that is against the law.in a racist state like Florida the verdict can not be a surprise to anyone. GZ is not a cop, he wants to think he is and the jury agreed. in NYC GZ would be heading to an upstate NY prison for manslaughter and would be spending the next 5-15 yrs. in protective custody as every home=boy in the prison system would want a piece of his ass.

      1. @Gerry, not trying to get in any kind of argument. I’m just saying F@ck that notion that I should turn a blind eye in MY OWN gated community/neighborhood.

        Florida is such a racist state, boohoohoo. Millions of Americans did not protest, case was close, justice served. bunch of racist eh?

        You can keep NYC

        1. IDK where that came from and do not care.

          Florida IS a racist state, always has been might always be one. I do not really care that much anyway.

  19. I’d like to say great article and this case has been so unjust that a blind man can see it. Everyone wants to play this reverse psychology like the so-called “white-man” is always attacked and never gets away with anything. You people that believe this are in denial your ancestors were the same way and their ways have be passed down to their descendants overtly and covertly. If it was the other way around no questions asked a black or brown man would be in jail from the start of the whole and the case would have been very quick. You deniers of the Truth forget some important facts most nations you deceived you end up killing for example, Native Americans welcomed you. what’s the result? Genocide! Another fact to remember Filipinos were invaded by the European-Americans with their own self
    interest couldn’t wait to try and exterminate these humble people. To take there natural resources, why is it that the U.S doesn’t teach this U.S history in all the Public schools? To keep a certain image? Why did you force people from different nations to stop keeping their culture and forget their traditions and calling it barbaric? Why did you call us niggers because we were of different shades of brown? Why did you sail thousands of Nautical miles to kill more brown people? The so-called Indian wars the continuation of the Frontier? And you want to sit here and say this wasn’t racist? Post-colonialism makes people want to be someone other than themselves like using creams and soaps to look white. This case was tragic and showed the world the fruits of the justice system in the U.S. A European-American killed a African-American and got away with it so far, point blank. Oh for people that want to say he isn’t white he is the seed of his father which is white that’s how you cut the confusion out.

    1. the native americans did not welcome a single person who is a live today. You want to make the sins of people’s fathers/ancestors an issue? even though it is a sort of bankrupt issue?
      go ahead, waste your time.

  20. Honestly, Trayvon Martin was not unarmed when he was killed by George Zimmerman. Martin was a typical Negroid gangster who hates whites and other races. Zimmerman had the right to defend himself because he was brutally attacked by Martin.

    Also, the mainstream Western media portrayed that Zimmerman was a white man. In fact, he is Hispanic. It is very evident in any statistics that the highest number of crimes are committed by the Negroids.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.